HeightsPeep Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 (edited) Concrete was already in the plan for the entire lot at Heights and 7th. The developer plan shows their intent to turn that whole lot into parking.The neighbors' architect suggested the developer could be creative by structuring parking behind. This would allow a nice front for walkers. I think he is right. Edited February 20, 2015 by HeightsPeep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealEstate Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 The neighbors' architect suggested the developer could be creative by structuring parking behind. This would allow a nice front for walkers. I think he is right. @HeightsPeep, you are obviously a neighbor with a vested interest and not a real estate developer.  As a person in the construction industry, I'll give you some help. With a speed ramp and structural footings, the developer would need a ground + 4 story parking garage to accommodate the parking on that lot.  It would be highly unlikely that they can economically justify a scaled 1 and 2 story retail development with a 5 story parking garage.  That is why TCR is building a 6 story project across the street. Based on your prior posts, I'm sure you would also then object to a 5 story garage being built.  Even with the garage, many patrons will still opt to park in the head-in parking and neighboring streets.  Some people, myself included, just prefer to surface park. As a neighbor who walks and bikes by this property every week, I am ashamed to have allowed people like you to be the voice of the Heights.  You do not represent my interests and quite frankly, your emotional tirades discredit your views.  I only hope this developer will come up with an acceptable alternative solution so that this project actually gets built. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted February 20, 2015 Author Share Posted February 20, 2015 The neighbors' architect suggested the developer could be creative by structuring parking behind. This would allow a nice front for walkers. I think he is right. I work in a building with structured parking. Despite my utter diligence, everyday I almost squish a pedestrian trying to pull out of the garage because you have to stick the front of your car out of the garage before you can see people on the sidewalk. It would not be nice for walkers to have to risk their lives getting across Yale only to be run over by someone coming out of a parking garage.  Also, you cannot fit a structured parking garage on that lot unless you put in under or over the building. As RealEstate noted, that would mean 4-5 stories. That part of the property is not in a historic district and can build as high as it wants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeightsPeep Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Thank you Real Estate for your "help," but I own a dozen properties in the Heights, some commercial and some residential. Do you? I have have never requested a variance and I provide adequate on site parking. I suggest this developer scale back and meet the requirements. Being greedy will backfire.Since you chose to live in a historic district, perhaps you should be ashamed for supporting the scale, design and public burden proposed by this project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 So apparently all the people who spoke against the variance yesterday have made their peace with the Heights Walmart development. That's what a development that doesn't need a parking variance looks like. Whenever they finish building whatever suburban-style strip center the neighbors want them to build, when I need to visit there to sell gold or buy a mattress, I'm going to park on the street out of spite.  1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bedmondson Posted February 20, 2015 Share Posted February 20, 2015 Thank you Real Estate for your "help," but I own a dozen properties in the Heights, some commercial and some residential. Do you?I have have never requested a variance and I provide adequate on site parking. I suggest this developer scale back and meet the requirements. Being greedy will backfire.Since you chose to live in a historic district, perhaps you should be ashamed for supporting the scale, design and public burden proposed by this project. Were you then one of the people who paid the mattress store developer to speak against the variance?  And if they decide to just move on and go with the easy Smoochies plan will you be more satisfied?   How about a Ashby Highrise type development? or something more like what is being built across the street? You don't get to pick and choose the developments that get built near you but you can support those that provide you with the highest quality of life and by rejecting this variance it opens up the possibility of getting something far worse.  **And still nobody has answered my qeustion about the head in parking. Because the variance was denied, why would this not be developed in to parallel parking and be big net loss of public parking to the area? The developer would have to get a variance to maintain that style parking right? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted February 20, 2015 Author Share Posted February 20, 2015 Since you chose to live in a historic district, perhaps you should be ashamed for supporting the scale, design and public burden proposed by this project. I live in a historic district.  You will not see another developer do a better job of respecting the scale, design and public burden of a retail development than this developer did.  The irony of all the crying about traffic and people parking their cars on the street (dear god no!!!) is that requiring big parking lots will just mean that all the retail redevelopment in the Heights will have to go on big lots and not in the small lots that line traditional commercial corridors like White Oak, 11th and 20th.  Where will new retail developments go?  Look out your front door.  The old rundown garden style apartments on Heights Blvd. are the perfect sized lot to convert into a small strip center with nice big parking lots.  By blocking the ability of people to redevelop odd shaped smaller lots, you are just ensuring that the larger lots on Heights will end up as retail strip centers with plenty of traffic and spillover parking problems.  3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealEstate Posted February 21, 2015 Share Posted February 21, 2015  Thank you Real Estate for your "help," but I own a dozen properties in the Heights, some commercial and some residential. Do you?  @HeightsPeep, I would like to offer some additional free advice - you would be far more persuasive if your arguments were based in logic and not in emotion.   These forums are meant to be an avenue of discussion about real estate and not avenues for personal attacks.  It's very easy to hide behind an alias and make claims of grandeur.  But to answer your question, I do own multiple residential and commercial properties in the area.  Not "a dozen" like you, but several.  And if you count units, I suppose I do own over "a dozen."  I've also developed and remodeled properties in the Heights.  These factors do not give me any more standing on this forum than my neighbors who own less in the area.   I have have never requested a variance and I provide adequate on site parking.  @HeightsPeep, buying in the area is as easy as writing a check and that action takes little skill. The vast majority of properties in the Heights do not meet current code and are grandfathered in.  Have you ever DEVELOPED a commercial property in the Heights? If so, why don't you share this property and your experiences with us? Again, we can all be heroes behind an online alias.    I suggest this developer scale back and meet the requirements. Being greedy will backfire.  You just said in your prior post that you wanted them to build a large parking garage.  But you now want them to "scale back" - which one is it?   As a person who spends his life building real estate, I know that developing a property that is the scale of this project is not a simple undertaking.  These developers should be applauded for their efforts and LACK of greed.  A greedy developer would have built a 20 story high rise structure on the large lot and replaced the smaller buildings with NNN drive-through deals.  That's not what the neighborhood wants to see here.  Have you ever contacted the developers of this project?  I reached out to them after reading about this project and they contacted me within minutes.  They couldn't have been any more professional and were genuinely enthusiastic about the positive impact this project will have for the area.   Since you chose to live in a historic district, perhaps you should be ashamed for supporting the scale, design and public burden proposed by this project.   @HeightsPeep, commercial land prices in the Heights no longer support the construction of SFR Victorian houses.  Have you not seen the architectural atrocities that almost every other developer in the Heights has built?  Do you even know what Yale looks like?  I cross it every day and it is architecturally horrific.  This development would be the single nicest property ever built in my corridor of the Heights.  Their architect's portfolio and reputation are beyond reproach.  Kudos to the developer for trying to use existing buildings and keeping a multi-parcel development.  I really hope the developer reads this message and knows that there are many more of us reasonable, progressive and appreciative Heights dwellers.  We will all support your project, so please retool your efforts and resubmit your plans.  3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverJK Posted February 23, 2015 Share Posted February 23, 2015 A combined 30 post between the two, are now the loudest people on this thread...  This is a perfect example of what is going on in the neighborhood.  (not saying either of you are new or insignificant to the 'hood, but I find the parallels amusing)I want this development to happen, as a user of the neighborhood. (I also happen to live here) 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowndes Posted March 13, 2015 Share Posted March 13, 2015 Any update on what might happen here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swtsig Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Any update on what might happen here?Lots of very good things. Parking has been resolved by acquiring additional parking. By my knowledge absolutely nothing has "been scaled back." Look for an awesome mix of very familiar and very new retail concepts. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avossos Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Lots of very good things. Parking has been resolved by acquiring additional parking. By my knowledge absolutely nothing has "been scaled back." Look for an awesome mix of very familiar and very new retail concepts.Swtsig is excited. If he is excited, I am excited! Haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeightsPeep Posted May 28, 2015 Share Posted May 28, 2015 Are they still planning to have restaurants? I think that will be a big problem. This development would have been really great north of 2200 on Yale!  Not so great near residences in the dry area. Neighbors will vociferously object to turning Heights Blvd to turn into Montrose. Any restaurant that leases from theme will be really upset when1) they realize they need a private club license and2) when the neighbors show up to protest that license and3) the developers are then asked about the sentiments of the neighbors and it turns out they knew all along the project was unwelcome!  These are just my thoughts, but I see that Revival location became a restaurant and it speaks volumes.  I have heard awful reviews from people who actually live in the neighborhood. It is not family friendly.   And a number of people are protesting the liquor license and they have not even filed for it yet, just posted a sign. Still, this would have been a great location for the yoga/juice bar place already planned on White Oak near Oxford. Not a fan of "Little Austin" but still... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted May 28, 2015 Author Share Posted May 28, 2015 Might want to think about how winning the battles against this development maybe affecting the war. I would presume that they have purchased the Golden Eagle property on Heights Blvd for additional parking as it is the only property on the market within the maximum distance for additional parking. So, by scuttling the parking variance on the grounds of protecting Heights Blvd, concerned residents will get the same development, but with a big parking lot on Heights Blvd. instead of residential redevelopment on the same spot. Oops. Telling TABC that the drunks are gonna eat your babies may also not be the best idea. Any restaurant that gets a private club license denied will just go BYOB. Just Dinner has been BYOB for years and is very successful. And I used to like to go to La Vista when I used to live out near the Galleria, but actually found that too many people were just using the food as an excuse to get pretty boozed up on the cheap. People can afford to drink a lot more booze when they are paying Spec's prices instead of the big restaurant mark up. Then, if the restaurants cannot make it without the private club permit, the restaurants that can make money without selling alcohol are the fast food franchises. Can't wait for Raising Cane's to set up shop.I have been to Revival for breakfast, lunch and dinner since they went to table service. Definitely working out the kinks in the table service, but there has been a lot of improvement each time I have been. Typical soft opening issues. I liked the counter service, but understand the need for table service and extending into dinner. @700 units of apartments are going in down the street. I am sure Revival is on a 5 year lease and will get walloped when their renewal comes up in light of the change in the neighborhood. This may be the only option for survival for Revival (see what I did there?). I will say the dinner menu is exceptional. I have kids who love Revival for breakfast and lunch. I will gladly get a sitter and have dinner there without the kids. Not every restaurant in the Heights has to serve a five dollar bowl of mac and cheese to get my business. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Are they still planning to have restaurants? I think that will be a big problem. This development would have been really great north of 2200 on Yale!  Not so great near residences in the dry area. Neighbors will vociferously object to turning Heights Blvd to turn into Montrose.   I know some people find it hard to believe, but there ARE actually residences north of 20th St. Arguably, there are more single family residences within a block of 23rd and Yale than within a block of 7th and Yale. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post swtsig Posted May 29, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted May 29, 2015 Are they still planning to have restaurants? I think that will be a big problem. This development would have been really great north of 2200 on Yale!  Not so great near residences in the dry area. Neighbors will vociferously object to turning Heights Blvd to turn into Montrose. Any restaurant that leases from theme will be really upset when1) they realize they need a private club license and2) when the neighbors show up to protest that license and3) the developers are then asked about the sentiments of the neighbors and it turns out they knew all along the project was unwelcome!  These are just my thoughts, but I see that Revival location became a restaurant and it speaks volumes.  I have heard awful reviews from people who actually live in the neighborhood. It is not family friendly.   And a number of people are protesting the liquor license and they have not even filed for it yet, just posted a sign. Still, this would have been a great location for the yoga/juice bar place already planned on White Oak near Oxford. Not a fan of "Little Austin" but still... you can almost smell the self-entitled douchebaggery from the computer screen.  a few pointer for you: 1) no one - and i mean no one - cares what you think2) the well established restaurateurs, retailers and development team don't need any advice from you3) if you think the property is so great for a yoga/juice bar you should've bought the damn properties yourself it's insane to me that a group as committed to developing a high quality, aesthetically appeasing project aimed at raising the bar for the neighborhood (and whom have worked their tail off in doing so) can be met with such ridiculous and downright asinine protest from a very minor yet boisterous group of blowhards. at first it was parking (oh no! street parking!), nevermind the fact that the development sits directly on the bike trail and is encouraging pedestrian traffic, and now that that issue has been resolved it's another stupid (i mean insanely stupid) argument (oh no! restaurants!!! kid-friendliness!!! liquor!!!!!!). I beg all of you, please... if i ever become a smarmy know-it-all curmudgeon of a NIMBY please please please come find me and kick my ass. /rant 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 Holy s h i t sig Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triton Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 10/10 Would read it again. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skooljunkie Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 All the eye rolling from reading the Heights page seriously affects my vision and focus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mkultra25 Posted May 29, 2015 Share Posted May 29, 2015 I think someone failed to consider the fact that Revival's supposed lack of "family-friendliness" might be a feature, not a bug. At least until bearded, craft-obsessed locavores start spawning in greater numbers. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowndes Posted May 30, 2015 Share Posted May 30, 2015 When did Revival become not family friendly? I eat there multiple times a week and the place always has plenty of families, especially on the weekend. My son (who is 3) and I have breakfast there every Saturday morning and if our daughter who is 1 seems to be in the mood to eat out my wife and her come as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted September 3, 2015 Author Share Posted September 3, 2015 Sign is up on the 700 block of Heights Blvd for the development. I believe that they have acquired all the property from the bike path up through the old Golden Eagle bindery on the west side of Heights Blvd. Very exciting to see this development get moving finally. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swtsig Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 last i got the lowdown on this there were some very cool tenants signed up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowndes Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Can you share any names? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFootsSocks Posted September 4, 2015 Share Posted September 4, 2015 Obviously not.We'll know in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted September 4, 2015 Author Share Posted September 4, 2015 http://www.radomcapital.com/#!heights-mercantile/cdtl Looks like we are finally getting a Tic Toc Clocks in the Heights.  I also hear rumors that the Heights is going to get a Bork, but not sure whether it is going to go in this development or elsewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowndes Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 Has anybody heard about any developments on this project. Â Ever since they put the signs up it has been pretty quiet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted October 27, 2015 Author Share Posted October 27, 2015 They got plans approved with HAHC for the bungalow by the bike path on Heights Blvd. The bungalow will not be modified much, but there will be an additional modern building built in the back with a patio between the two buildings. They demoed the Golden Eagle building to make way for a parking lot. I have heard that the utility connections to the warehouse have been cut off in anticipation of a demo. Definitely some signs of life, but I would expect a lot more activity soon. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s3mh Posted November 30, 2015 Author Share Posted November 30, 2015 http://heightsmercantile.com/buildings Updated site plan showing parking at the old demolished Golden Eagle buildings.  They will use both bungalows on Heights Blvd.  Have not seen much activity on site recently.  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angostura Posted December 1, 2015 Share Posted December 1, 2015 So we get an extra surface parking lot on Heights Blvd. Thank you, parking nazis, and the Planning Commission that enables them. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.